Did Assemblyman Van Tran, in only one sentence, just cause a conflict of interest that forever bars the mighty law firm of Snell & Wilmer from conducting any business before the City of Westminster?
The Bolsavik knows very little of how the public law business works, but some of the things that just happened raised the issue.
Assemblyman Van Tran is a lawyer, yes, but he’s not a free-floating, unattached lawyer the way he was when he had his solo office on Bolsa. He’s now affiliated with a law firm, being of-counsel to the 400-attorney-strong Snell & Wilmer L.L.P.
Now, the rule is, in a law firm, a conflict of interest by one lawyer affects all their lawyers.
Most large law firms have a database and full-time people dedicated just to make sure the numerous relationships by their hundreds of lawyers don’t conflict with the firm’s work.
Now, Van Tran just went out of his way to identify himself, several times and on recorded audio tape, to law enforcement officers, that he’s the lawyer to Westminster City Councilman Andy Quach (read here; source here). That probably makes Quach his client.
As a matter of law, that would make Andy Quach a client of the entire firm of Snell & Wilmer.
Does that mean that as long as Quach sits on the Westminster City Council, Snell & Wilmer (and its hundreds of lawyers) is barred from conducting any business for, and/or before, and/or against, the city?
Does it mean Snell & Wilmer can’t represent the city?
Does it mean Snell & Wilmer can’t represent any of its thousands of clients with businesses before the city?
Does it mean that Snell & Wilmer can never represent any clients, even the numerous developers who are its current clients, who want to sue the city?
And if Snell is currently representing anyone suing or doing business with Westminster, does it mean the firm has to conflict out and renounce that business?
(more…)